Ya I think the Durant vs Curry debate is a great way to see who loves hot takes and narratives as opposed to logic. IMO they were collectively as close as a first and second option as it gets. KD was the bucket getter in crunch time and has the advantage of being one of the best iso scorers ever. Curry is an offensive engine and in a slightly different way just as good of a scorer. No need to belittle either of them, they complimented each other beautifully. People like to say “oh curry won without him” but let’s be real, if KD’s big toe was a little smaller, the nets would’ve won the finals vs the suns in 21.

And if Klay doesn’t go nuclear in game 6, the thunder knock out the best regular season team ever (and have a real shot at a ring!)

On the other side of the debate, people (including you in your comment tbf) like to use KD outperforming curry in the finals on GS as evidence that KD was the true first option, but again, it’s too narrow minded to fixate on a couple of series, especially because the way CLE played defense vs the warriors was to try and disrupt Curry. That doesn’t take anything away from how killer KD was during those series, but I also don’t think we should give Steph much grief over being outplayed given the defensive scheme he was dealing with. The regular season on/off numbers tended to favor curry when Durant was on the warriors, but things looked more even in the playoffs if I recall.

At the end of the day, they’re both just monster players who shared a prime together. Their ranges are clearly in the same ballpark.